How bad will stimulus checks and unemployments benefits affect us?

[SansVarnic]

3 minutes ago, dalekphalm said:

You didn’t provide a source that says the US government is obligated to compensate people for lost income (which you now expanded to being unable to enjoy your normal lifestyle, etc or whatever it was you said to Lady Fitz). 

 

Please provide a source for that. 

ediftd comment.... hit enter before I was finished.

[SpaceGhostC2C]

10 hours ago, comander said:

Either way, both myself and my SO fail to qualify. For the US handout and we'll be paying for the stimuli with higher taxes. 

Which taxes have been increased as part of this program?

 

 

8 hours ago, PurplDrank said:

Japan and China hold most of the debt. Look at the charts. 

 

https://www.thebalance.com/who-owns-the-u-s-national-debt-3306124

Those charts clearly show that the majority of US public debt is held by domestic agents.

[dalekphalm]

2 minutes ago, SpaceGhostC2C said:

Which taxes have been increased as part of this program?

I think he’s implying that taxes will need to be raised. 
 

Not that the US has raised taxes to deal with the existing $24T or so of debt, so there’s really no way to tell. 

2 minutes ago, SpaceGhostC2C said:

 

 

Those charts clearly show that the majority of US public debt is held by domestic agents.

Agreed. 
 

The idea that the US being unable to pay back Chinese debt in and of itself is silly. The idea that it will destroy America is even more silly.

[dalekphalm]

8 minutes ago, SansVarnic said:

ediftd comment.... hit enter before I was finished.

So I re read your post. You still don’t have a source. If it’s complex to get that source, I will give you time to do so. 
 

But the idea that the government must compensate you from property does not inherently apply to other things. It would need to explicitly be worded such that it applies to other things. 
 

Wages are not properly. Nor is “lifestyle” which is incredibly hard to define anyway. 

[SpaceGhostC2C]

Just now, dalekphalm said:

I think he’s implying that taxes will need to be raised. 
 

Not that the US has raised taxes to deal with the existing $24T or so of debt, so there’s really no way to tell. 

Yes, that's what I'm getting to. I mean, sometimes a program is announced together with a means to obtain additional resources, but in cases like this the "higher future taxes" si an assumption without a very clear grounding. Theoretically, there's no reason to assert that taxes will be higher, and empirically it hasn't been the case with many debt-financed programs in times of crises.

 

But I wanted to double-check because maybe something was announced on the revenue side this time.

 

[SpaceGhostC2C]

1 minute ago, dalekphalm said:

But the idea that the government must compensate you from property does not inherently apply to other things. It would need to explicitly be worded such that it applies to other things. 
 

Wages are not properly. Nor is “lifestyle” which is incredibly hard to define anyway. 

I'm no lawyer but I'm pretty sure this was a discretionary measure. Certainly, the amount paid out isn't really correlated with foregone earnings.

[SansVarnic]

9 minutes ago, dalekphalm said:

Wages are not properly. Nor is “lifestyle” which is incredibly hard to define anyway. 

 Of course wages are not property per se but taking away your ability to earn or your time and right to travel to do so. It falls more on interpretation of the law than exact wording here.

I am working on this at the moment.

It will be somewhat lengthy.

 

*please note that property does not necessarily define as land, many make this mistake when reading the 5th amendment, even though land is brought up many times. I have been scolded about this by my friend.

[dalekphalm]

3 minutes ago, SpaceGhostC2C said:

Yes, that's what I'm getting to. I mean, sometimes a program is announced together with a means to obtain additional resources, but in cases like this the "higher future taxes" si an assumption without a very clear grounding. Theoretically, there's no reason to assert that taxes will be higher, and empirically it hasn't been the case with many debt-financed programs in times of crises.

Yep - in fact, many modern governments have an attitude of "It's not my problem" with their debt. In modern society there's very little downside to taking on more and more federal debt without paying it down, as long as your economy can handle it over the long term.

 

In fact, beyond that, for most countries, even if they can afford to totally pay off their federal debt, there's very little reason to do so. Keeping it low is certainly wise, but running a government that never borrows money is a government that never does long term large investments beyond normal operations.

3 minutes ago, SpaceGhostC2C said:

But I wanted to double-check because maybe something was announced on the revenue side this time.

Not that I'm aware of, no.

1 minute ago, SpaceGhostC2C said:

I'm no lawyer but I'm pretty sure this was a discretionary measure. Certainly, the amount paid out isn't really correlated with foregone earnings.

Oh I'm in 100% agreement with you - SansVanic was the first person I saw ever mention the "stimulus cheques" being some kind of compensation to lost wages (which, later, turned into lost freedom of lifestyle or something).

 

I've never heard of the idea that the government must compensate you for lost wages. Eminent Domain gives the government the ability to seize your land (property) and they must compensate you fair market value for it. But I've never once heard anyone try and extend Eminent Domain beyond land property.

[SansVarnic]

7 minutes ago, dalekphalm said:

Oh I'm in 100% agreement with you - SansVanic was the first person I saw ever mention the "stimulus cheques" being some kind of compensation to lost wages (which, later, turned into lost freedom of lifestyle or something).

 

I've never heard of the idea that the government must compensate you for lost wages. Eminent Domain gives the government the ability to seize your land (property) and they must compensate you fair market value for it. But I've never once heard anyone try and extend Eminent Domain beyond land property.

In the bill passed it states this is for loss if income and other things, that is why I made claim for compensation for wages. I linked the bill, its long winded to read of course.

 

Eminent Domain historically has been used for land, lesser known for other types of property but I have heard in passing, I do not have sources to pull from, unfortunately, to link.

[SpaceGhostC2C]

Just now, SansVarnic said:

In the bill passed it states this is for loss if income and other things. I linked the bill, its long winded to read of course.

That is indeed the motivation, but it doesn't mean it was necessary to comply with another rule.

 

Just now, SansVarnic said:

 

Eminent Domain historically has been used for land, lesser known for other types of property but I have heard in passing, I do not have sources to pull from, unfortunately, to link.

The thing is, even if one tries to use expropriation rules for people, the analogy would require some use of the resource by the government. Like a mass levy or something.

Governments are currently restricting activities (technically, everyone can switch to a home office job or become youtubers, people in themselves are not "taken over" by the state). Moreover, my understanding is that lockdowns are decided at the state and local levels, so there would be no basis for the federal government being liable for the compensation (if a city hall expropriates your land to build a road, the city is the one that needs to pay you).

[SansVarnic]

1 minute ago, SpaceGhostC2C said:

That is indeed the motivation, but it doesn't mean it was necessary to comply with another rule.

 

The thing is, even if one tries to use expropriation rules for people, the analogy would require some use of the resource by the government. Like a mass levy or something.

Governments are currently restricting activities (technically, everyone can switch to a home office job or become youtubers, people in themselves are not "taken over" by the state). Moreover, my understanding is that lockdowns are decided at the state and local levels, so there would be no basis for the federal government being liable for the compensation (if a city hall expropriates your land to build a road, the city is the one that needs to pay you).

Yeah on the surface its a weak argument, I refer to the 5th amendment as part of the argument. I am waiting to hear back so I can give a more in-depth explanation, may not be until tomorrow before I speak to him.

[straight_stewie]

Like as not, the Economic Impact package won't have any serious long term consequences in-and-of-itself so long as the following holds:

• It remains a once/twice/thrice payment. This means that it does not turn into UBI (which would have obvious economic impacts both good and bad)
• The vast majority of new people on welfare/unemployment are only temporary, which seems to be the case.
• The government does not decide to pay for the package by printing money (it doesn't look like they are going to). A relatively small increase in our national debt won't have serious consequences. Suddenly printing many trillions of dollars will reduce the international value of a dollar and lead to some unknown amount of negative economic impact.

[dalekphalm]

1 minute ago, SpaceGhostC2C said:

That is indeed the motivation, but it doesn't mean it was necessary to comply with another rule.

Agreed - and that's my point. Just because the CARE Act was passed with the intention of compensating people for lost wages does not mean the government had to compensate for lost wages.

 

They did it because someone floated the idea, it sounded like good PR, and it would put a chunk of money back into the economy for basic necessities.

1 minute ago, SpaceGhostC2C said:

The thing is, even if one tries to use expropriation rules for people, the analogy would require some use of the resource by the government. Like a mass levy or something.

Governments are currently restricting activities (technically, everyone can switch to a home office job or become youtubers, people in themselves are not "taken over" by the state). Moreover, my understanding is that lockdowns are decided at the state and local levels, so there would be no basis for the federal government being liable for the compensation (if a city hall expropriates your land to build a road, the city is the one that needs to pay you).

All good points.

 

10 minutes ago, SansVarnic said:

In the bill passed it states this is for loss if income and other things, that is why I made claim for compensation for wages. I linked the bill, its long winded to read of course.

Makes sense, but as I agreed with SpaceGhost above, just because they say they want to compensate for lost wages doesn't mean they legally have to. Plus, as we've seen, people quality for the $1200 even if they aren't working, and therefore have not lost any wages, such as retirees.

10 minutes ago, SansVarnic said:

Eminent Domain historically has been used for land, lesser known for other types of property but I have heard in passing, I do not have sources to pull from, unfortunately, to link.

I have never heard of Eminent Domain being used for non-property things.

 

But I digress - if you can find a good source that says the Government had to compensate people for the COVID lockdown - well, it'll be an interesting read if nothing else.

 

5 minutes ago, SansVarnic said:

Yeah on the surface its a weak argument, I refer to the 5th amendment as part of the argument. I am waiting to hear back so I can give a more in-depth explanation, may not be until tomorrow before I speak to him.

I'm assuming your linchpin for the 5th Amendment comes down to this phrase?

Quote

nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law

Even if you could argue that yes, the Government isn't allowed to do a total lockdown, that still has nothing to do with compensation - simply that there must be due process of law.

 

The only part of the 5th that mentions compensation is the very last bit:

Quote

;nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation

The part about compensation is specifically about that single sentence, not the entire amendment.

 

Besides all of that, the simple fact is that these orders are usually issued at the state level, using a state law, which could be argued as being part of "due process of law".

[SansVarnic]

2 minutes ago, dalekphalm said:

Agreed - and that's my point. Just because the CARE Act was passed with the intention of compensating people for lost wages does not mean the government had to compensate for lost wages.

 

They did it because someone floated the idea, it sounded like good PR, and it would put a chunk of money back into the economy for basic necessities.

All good points.

 

Makes sense, but as I agreed with SpaceGhost above, just because they say they want to compensate for lost wages doesn't mean they legally have to. Plus, as we've seen, people quality for the $1200 even if they aren't working, and therefore have not lost any wages, such as retirees.

I have never heard of Eminent Domain being used for non-property things.

 

But I digress - if you can find a good source that says the Government had to compensate people for the COVID lockdown - well, it'll be an interesting read if nothing else.

 

I'm assuming your linchpin for the 5th Amendment comes down to this phrase?

Even if you could argue that yes, the Government isn't allowed to do a total lockdown, that still has nothing to do with compensation - simply that there must be due process of law.

 

The only part of the 5th that mentions compensation is the very last bit:

The part about compensation is specifically about that single sentence, not the entire amendment.

 

Besides all of that, the simple fact is that these orders are usually issued at the state level, using a state law, which could be argued as being part of "due process of law".

Pretty much you summed a good portion of it up. From my understanding.

The government did not have to do this at all, they never have in the past, reason I said this was good start... some comments ago.

I make the legal obligation argument based on the above understanding from what I was told/informed (and from what I have researched on my own), so I apologize if made certain "words in stone" phrasing prior to this. That wasn't my intention. From my limited understanding there is an obligation for the government to make compensation, the fact that the Federal level is making that compensation instead of the State level just shows how much the Federal level is stepping up here but also it shows just how much power the Federal level has "wrought" from the states in a way.... but that is a discussion for another time.

 

16 minutes ago, dalekphalm said:

Besides all of that, the simple fact is that these orders are usually issued at the state level, using a state law, which could be argued as being part of "due process of law".

This last part you said, I have heard used in argument. But it seems the Federal Level by direction of the President seems to be taking responsibility for that action.

 

 

Just to clarify most of my research on constitutional law comes from Cornell Law Schools Legal Information Institute and Drake University Law School Law Library.

https://www.law.cornell.edu/

https://www.drake.edu/law/library/

[StDragon]

Hyperinflation. Sooner or later... It's insidious as it creeps up and picks up steam. By the time you realize the devaluation of currency, choices for mitigation become somewhat impossible because everyone is chasing means of locking up their wealth in assets that float with said inflation.

 

But you know what's really shocking? it's better than deflation. Deflation means everyone folds and bails. The economy grinds to a halt during deflation. That's bad!

[wamred]

On 4/23/2020 at 6:53 PM, oskar23 said:

There must be a downside for giving out so much money weekly and with stimulus checks. While everyone is happpy and wants more whats the bad side of it? I know people who used to make 500/600$ here in the US and now they got $800 weekly + $1200 from stimulus. What sense does it make?? Its great isnt it?

What about other countries? Do they give out money? Will it crash financial system? I hear more often about virtual currency now so they can see how much we get and what we spend on. It sounds crazy but back in a day we laughed that this virus wont affect us and it did..  will we live in different reality 2 years from now?

I didn't even get one because I am in college and my mom claimed me..........

[SpaceGhostC2C]

1 hour ago, comander said:

Today none. There's basically no desire to balance budgets and there won't be until the US's debt starts looking a bit more Greek or Argentinian - at which point interest rates will go from low to "holy cow". 

The US debt cannot look like the ones of Greece or Argentina, among other things, because it's the US Argentina defaulted when public debt was 40% of its GDP and interest rates were in the 15% range (until credit stopped altogether), and it's currently undergoing a restructuring of similar proportions. Greece got hit by the global financial crisis at a time where it had revealed that their numbers were made up so their actual position was discretely different.

The US, on the other hand, belong to the group of countries with 0% rates or getting paid to issue debt for a number of reasons, including the US dollar being a world reference currency (and hence something that cannot depreciate against the dollar, that is, itself), their ability to issue more of it if necessary, US assets being used as "safe havens" whenever capitals fly from other countries, and a long etc.

You can look online for a cross-country comparison of debt/GDP ratios and realize that neither the level of debt, nor debt/GDP, is a good predictor of debt crises. Countries enter debt crises typically as rollover crises for expensive and short term debt.

 

1 hour ago, comander said:

Debt has to be paid eventually.  

This isn't 100% correct, debt doesn't need to be paid, only its interests. I know people tend to be mislead by analogies between personal finances and the finances of a state, or even a whole economy, but that's just that, a flawed analogy (heck, even people not always need to pay back the principal on debts - some mortgages in Switzerland are designed so you never reduce the stock of debt past a certain level).

And the interests, which do have to be paid, are extremely low these days.

Then there is another point that people tend to miss when making the "future taxes" claims: even if the debt had to be "eventually paid" (it hasn't), that does not translate automatically into higher taxes. Let's say you want debt/GDP to return to some previous lower level for some reason: as GDP grows, that ratio is eroded over time, so whether additional spending cuts or taxes are needed will depend on the relative speed of economic growth vs interest accumulation on the debt (which, right now, is essentially 0%).

Which is why you heard these "higher taxes in the future" argument repeatedly throughout the decades, yet very little has happened in terms of tax reform in the US (other than tax reductions, that is). Since no tax increase has been announced for the current situation, let's go back in time: which taxes were increased to offset the government intervention during the 2007-2009 financial crisis?

 

1 hour ago, comander said:

Most of the tax burden falls on those in the top fifth. 

 

I think you are confusing gross amounts and tax burden in this sentence

1 hour ago, comander said:

I am. The 2B will need to be covered eventually,

only its interests (see above)

1 hour ago, comander said:

assuming that the world's economy isn't infinite and ever growing

It pretty much has been ever growing since the industrial revolution. But now you're talking about the world economy instead as the American one, which is confusing: the world as a whole is always at zero debt.

 

1 hour ago, comander said:

this means high tax loads. 

As explained above, it doesn't necessarily follow.

 

1 hour ago, comander said:

 

The real issue isn't the current debt. It's unfunded liabilities + debt + the possibility of interest rates increasing. Government accounting would make Enron blush. 

 

https://www.google.com/amp/s/fee.org/articles/18-facts-on-the-us-national-debt-that-are-almost-too-hard-to-believe//amp

I wouldn't hold high hopes for Buzzfeed-type articles

 

1 hour ago, comander said:

 

The 22.5T debt works out to 183k per tax payer. If you mostly push that on the top fifth, you'll have the upper middle class paying half a million extra dollars in taxes over their lives to cover the existing debt. 

I don't understand why anyone would ever undertake such nonsensical policy without need. In fact, it's not just Americans that would suffer for no reason, but every financial market worldwide would collapse if they went to buy US bonds and found out the US has wiped them off the market with no intention of issuing more...

[SpaceGhostC2C]

26 minutes ago, comander said:

While it's true only interest needs to be served and that the current interest rate is low, the latter isn't guaranteed forever. 

But you're also don't need to issue debt forever. You're using it now. 

26 minutes ago, comander said:

My assumption is that eventually there will come a time where the interest rate goes to 4%

Not happening in the foreseeable future. Low rates are here to stay, and the ZLB is more of a concern than an increase in rates. 

26 minutes ago, comander said:

When that does... Ouch. What's 4% of 50T over 100M tax payers? 20k. 

That's not the right math. Future rates determine payments on future issuances of debt. Already issued debt has it interest rate fixed. It's the secondary market that fluctuates, but the has no consequences for tax payers. 

Multiplying an assumed future rate times the existing stock of debt is a meaningless calculation. 

 

26 minutes ago, comander said:

Literally one credit hiccup, and higher interest and things get crazy.

You're describing Argentina, a country worth massive rollover needs due to the short horizons on its bonds. It's not a good description of US debt at all. 

 

26 minutes ago, comander said:

 

It's very possible that a good chunk of richer nations, including Japan, face similar issues. At that point it's asset liquidation time. 

Not really, but if it comes to that, it's just another debt restructuring in the belt. Firms finances are also a flawed analogy for government debt. 

 

 

 

So, which taxes were hiked to cover the 2007-2009 fiscal stimulus? 

[Austinham]

On 4/23/2020 at 11:12 PM, TempestCatto said:

It's all bullshit because college students get shafted the most. Anyone who says otherwise is a boomer. 

 

I'm no Boomer, noware close. A 90s kid to be exact. Alot of collage students get way to much handed to them only to expect more. I'm mean really?  Why not... I don't know? Find a short term job to pay the bills? There's a lot of low level basic jobs to be had right now.

[Falkentyne]

On 4/23/2020 at 8:12 PM, TempestCatto said:

It's all bullshit because college students get shafted the most. Anyone who says otherwise is a boomer. Thankfully, I'm about to transfer schools so my school debts are minimal right now, but all of my other friends are literally fucked. Not to mention, if you had a class that required labs, you can't do the labs this semester. BUT you don't get refunded for it, BUT it's still required so now you have to pay TWICE to take the same thing. If I was in the school I'm about to transfer too, I would be super fucked because I'd be taking flight lessons. All of those would be canceled and I wouldn't get a refund for those classes, plus I'd still have to pay my loans, PLUS I'd have to take those classes over again to actually get the hours in. Fun shit here the US of Ass.

 

Another thing, is here in PA, small businesses are getting absolutely ass fucked. In the spoiler below this text is a copy of a Facebook post from a small business owner here in the tyrannical state of PA.

  Reveal hidden contents

I'm really sorry about the long post, but do you want to know why people are so angry in Pennsylvania? No, it’s not because their gun toting, ignorant rednecks. This is an honest, unbiased, unpolitical account of the economic disaster to small business owners from Covid-19 in the State of Pennsylvania. This is my story.

 

I own a small, family run Martial Arts School in Rural Pennsylvania, with 6 part time employees. I, along with all other “Non-essential” business, were ordered to shut down due to the pandemic. We were told there would be financial aid from the government, and it would last 2 Weeks to slow the spread and flatten the curve. The quarantine was never meant to be a long term solution or to last indefinitely. “Shut Down, Shut Up, Don’t Worry, we’ll take care of you” was the message we received. Two Weeks turned into 4 weeks, now we’re on 6 weeks, and our Governor has ordered us closed at least 2 more weeks, with absolutely no guarantee of being re-opened. My son and I have not taken a paycheck for 6 weeks, and we have had NONE OF THE FINANCIAL AID we were promised.

 

My business was eligible for 2 Federal Loans. The PPP (Payment Protection Program), and the EIDL - Small Business Disaster Loan. I applied and was apparently approved for both. The PPP is very small (13% of my average monthly income, not even enough to pay my monthly Lease), and is meant to pay employees, but how can I pay employees, when the State of PA won’t let me open. The second loan, the EIDL is meant to be a larger sum, and is meant to be used at the business owners discretion to keep the doors open. That Loan has yet to materialize, and they changed the qualifications so now I will receive only 60% of what I was initially promised. I have heard nothing about the second loan since I applied about a month ago.

 

I must remind you I am not getting political, or giving my opinion, this is my current situation. I did not make this about being a Democrat or a Republican, this is a health and economic crisis, and I am treating it as such. I reached out to our PA Elected Officials. I was respectful and professional, regardless of party affiliation. I learned about Senate Bill 613 that was sponsored by senator Mensch. This bill would give small business owners the opportunity to re-open as long as they could comply with FEDERAL CDC GUIDELINES. The bill would also bring PA businesses in line with EVERY OTHER STATE IN THE NATION, and not the “Essential, Non-Essential” guidelines laid out by PA Governor Tom Wolf. The bill passed the PA House, and Pa Senate, but was vetoed by the Governor. I don’t care about the politics of the bill, but as it turned out the bill was voted for exclusively by Republicans, and voted against exclusively Democrats. SB 613 would have laid out a plan to safely and responsibly open my business using objective and transparent criteria. This bill would have also let barbers, hairdressers, car sales, real estate agents and countless other professionals back to work safely and responsibly. Our President, Donald Trump, also laid out a 3 phase plan, which would have also allowed me to open, as long as I could COMPLY WITH CDC Guidelines. Governor Wolf has decided to ignore that as well. There is simply no logic to allowing hundreds of people into big box stores such as Walmart and Home Depot, yet not allowing small businesses to open if they follow CDC Guidelines. Basically, 50 people can touch the same dirty shelf and product at Home Depot, but I can’t buy a car or show a house if we’re both wearing a mask? How does that work? As an absolute spit in the face to small business, State run Liquor stores and the State Lottery are now open and “Essential?”

 

As of now, and as I understand it, the current plan for re-opening, will begin possibly May 8th. He did say Construction workers can go back to work, so that’s good. Wolf said he had a 6 point plan, but (I’m reading it on his website now) it gives no specifics, no metrics, no criteria, no industries, and no timeline. So, 8 weeks of no plan, no paycheck, no specifics, and none of the help I was promised. I have received at least a little financial aid from the Federal Government, and a tremendous amount of communication from our President. I have received NO HELP and very little communication from our Governor. To be very clear, he has left small businesses to fend for themselves, and seems to be actively working against us at every turn.

 

Now you have some perspective on why people are so angry and protesting. We have done everything and more of what we’ve been asked, now we need Real Leadership and a real plan to safely open PA from Governor Wolf.

 

I also am not working currently, so I applied for unemployment. However, it's going to take a few weeks to get an ID number to then continue the filing. What the fuck am I supposed to do till then? My work will take me back once this shit storm passes, but for right now - I'm running on pennies. The only people making bank right now are those that were already on unemployment. We need a serious reform to this whole system.

 

 

 

Just to educate you a bit, Gen X'ers and millennials are not boomers.  "boomers" technically are people over the age of 55.  And everyone forgot about the arcade game generation of kids...

Gates is techically a boomer, but Steve Jobs was borderline.

 

Or is your term an insult meaning anyone who disagrees with you is a senior citizen?  I guess that makes you a Zoomer, eh?

[StDragon]

23 minutes ago, Austinham said:

I'm no Boomer, noware close. A late 90s kid to be exact. Alot of collage students get way to much handed to them only to expect more. I'm mean really?  Why not... I don't know? Find a short term job to pay the bills? There's a lot of low level basic jobs to be had right now.

That's correct.

 

In America at least, there's a shortage of skilled labor such as construction, electrical, plumbing, machining, etc. For the longest time, the Big Lie is that everyone needs to go to college or else you're a nobody. At the same time, the work ethic culture has been eroded. Mike Rowe goes on this quite extensively; you can look him up.

 

Secondly, College tuition has been going up because the government has been distorting the market. It's all about Supply/Demand. There's a finite amount of supply, so when loans are easier to obtain, everyone that can will apply. You're just competing against the other students until there's a supply/demand equilibrium. Hand out more cash, the price of tuition goes up, people ask for more cash. It's a feedback cycle.

 

Third, there's grade inflation. While it's ageism to suggest, perhaps it's best to base one's academic qualifications based on the year they graduated from. But then again, once you've gained job experience and stay the course on career path, it's not nearly as important as it was fresh out of college. At least for most people.

[kokakolia]

@StDragonIn America construction jobs are ruthless. I'm tired of hearing about this construction "Eldorado" myth. I worked in the oil patch in Canada between 2017 - 2019 during the worst recession since... forever ago? 

 

When the economy is good:

 

- Everyone works

- Safety is a priority 

- Benefits 

- Worker's rights are considered 

- Subcontractors are working for a profit

 

However, as a "doomer" my experience was:

 

- Suck it up or go home. You're fortunate to even have a single opportunity. There are 100 people in line to take your job. 

- Sub contractors working at a break-even or a loss. Corners are cut everywhere and it's a blame game when something inevitably goes wrong. I almost hurled when a client from a big oil company said that projects have never been so cheap to pursue thanks to sub contractors out-bidding themselves. 

- Safety rules are twisted as a means of firing people in case of a breach. It's a witch hunt. But hey, if you can't get this job done faster someone else will. 

- When the stock market tanks, all projects shut down suddenly and you can have no work and no pay for months. It's totally effed' up to see senior land surveyors pick up empty water bottles on the side of the road during work because they're not even guaranteed income for the next couple of months. Once their 1 or 2 week job is over, they're sitting at home waiting for a phone call. I only worked maybe 7 months out of 12 in 2018.

- Benefits, workers rights etc... are slowly withering away. You gotta settle for less because someone else will. 

 

Basically, in construction you only work when you're needed. Salaries and benefits are stagnating. Someone "better" is always around the corner to take your job. 

 

 

 

 

 

[Deli]

9 hours ago, StDragon said:

That's correct.

 

In America at least, there's a shortage of skilled labor such as construction, electrical, plumbing, machining, etc. For the longest time, the Big Lie is that everyone needs to go to college or else you're a nobody. At the same time, the work ethic culture has been eroded. Mike Rowe goes on this quite extensively; you can look him up.

 

Secondly, College tuition has been going up because the government has been distorting the market. It's all about Supply/Demand. There's a finite amount of supply, so when loans are easier to obtain, everyone that can will apply. You're just competing against the other students until there's a supply/demand equilibrium. Hand out more cash, the price of tuition goes up, people ask for more cash. It's a feedback cycle.

 

Third, there's grade inflation. While it's ageism to suggest, perhaps it's best to base one's academic qualifications based on the year they graduated from. But then again, once you've gained job experience and stay the course on career path, it's not nearly as important as it was fresh out of college. At least for most people.

The flood of wealthy foreign students apply for US colleges probably has more to do to distort the supply demand.

[StDragon]

3 minutes ago, kokakolia said:

@StDragonIn America construction jobs are ruthless. I'm tired of hearing about this construction "Eldorado" myth. I worked in the oil patch in Canada between 2017 - 2019 during the worst recession since... forever ago? 

 

When the economy is good:

 

- Everyone works

- Safety is a priority 

- Benefits 

- Worker's rights are considered 

- Subcontractors are working for a profit

 

However, as a "doomer" my experience was:

 

- Suck it up or go home. You're fortunate to even have a single opportunity. There are 100 people in line to take your job. 

- Sub contractors working at a break-even or a loss. Corners are cut everywhere and it's a blame game when something inevitably goes wrong. I almost hurled when a client from a big oil company said that projects have never been so cheap to pursue thanks to sub contractors out-bidding themselves. 

- Safety rules are twisted as a means of firing people in case of a breach. It's a witch hunt. But hey, if you can't get this job done faster someone else will. 

- When the stock market tanks, all projects shut down suddenly and you can have no work and no pay for months. It's totally effed' up to see senior land surveyors pick up empty water bottles on the side of the road during work because they're not even guaranteed income for the next couple of months. Once their 1 or 2 week job is over, they're sitting at home waiting for a phone call. I only worked maybe 7 months out of 12 in 2018.

- Benefits, workers rights etc... are slowly withering away. You gotta settle for less because someone else will. 

 

Basically, in construction you only work when you're needed. Salaries and benefits are stagnating. Someone "better" is always around the corner to take your job. 

 

 

 

 

 

Prior to this COVID19, unemployment was a a historical low in America. Though part of that statement is disingenuous in part because those that are underemployed still count as employed. And, those that stopped seeking employment aren't officially counted as unemployed. That said, there's more demand for skilled labor than clerical work.

 

Globalism is a race to the bottom. My advice is two-fold. Industry serves both needs and wants. If a job can be outsourced or in sourced with H1B or H2B visa workers, it will. Choose an occupation that's based on a need (it's reliable), and can't be outsourced and so easily in-sourced.

 

As for the public policy equation, that between the electorate and officials. But one of the big problems I see so far is that money in Wall Street hasn't rolled over to Main Street as expected in the past.

 

 

[kokakolia]

@StDragonMy point was that the construction industry treats its people like disposable labor. You can have a high demand one day and no demand next month. Nothing is guaranteed. You can't just say get this career over the other. The economy is so volatile and so are the jobs which depend on it. 

 

If the current trend continues, I am just worried that there will be a dystopian future out there where skilled workers will have to bid their own work on a LinkedIn app. And suddenly everyone is a temp worker trading their labor for crumbs. Everything can become a race to the bottom.